The Sānkhya Kārikā, with the Bhāshya of Gauḍapāda — trans. H. T. Colebrooke and H. H. Wilson (1837)

right affirmation; such as, Invra, the king of the gods; the northern Kurus; the nymphs of heaven; and the like. That which is not ascertainable by perception or inference, is derived from apt (or sufficient) authority. It is also said ; “ They call scripture, right affirmation ; right, as free from error. Let not one exempt from fault affirm a falsehood without adequate reason. He who in his appointed office is free from partiality or enmity, and is ever respected by persons of the same character, such a man is to be regarded as apt (fit or worthy).” In these three are comprised all kinds of proof. Ja1min1 describes six sorts of proof. Which of those then are not proofs? They are, presumption (arthdpattt), proportion (sambhava), privation (abhdva), comprehension (pratibhd), oral communication (aitihya), and comparison (upamdna). Thus: “Presumption” is twofold, ‘seen’ and ‘heard.’ ‘ Seen’ is where in one case the existence of spirit is admitted, and it is presumed that it exists in another. ‘Heard; Devavatta does not eat by day, and yet grows fat: it is presumed then that he eats by night. “ Proportion ;" By the term one prastha, four kuravas are equally designated. “ Privation” is fourfold ; prior, mutual, constant, and total. ‘ Prior;’ as, Devapatta in childhood, youth, &c. ‘Mutual ;’ as, Water jar in cloth. ‘Constant ;’ as, The horns of an ass; the son of a barren woman; the flowers of the sky. ‘Total’ privation, or destruction ; as when cloth is burnt, or as from contemplating withered grain, want of rain is ascertained. In this manner privation is manifold. ‘‘ Comprehension ;” as, The part of the country that lies between the Vindhya mountains on the north and Sahya mountains on the south, extending to the sea, is pleasant. By this sentence it is intended to express that there are many agreeable circumstances comprehended in that country, the name of the site indicating its several products. “Oral communication ;” as, When people report there is a fiend in the fig-tree. ‘‘ Comparison ;” The Gavaya is like a cow; a lake is like a sea. These are the six kinds of proof; but they are comprised

p. 20

in the three ; for presumption is included in inference, and proportion, privation, comprehension, oral communication, and comparison, are comhended in right affirmation. Therefore from the expressions (in the text), they comprise every mode of demonstration, and are admitted to be threefold proof, it is said, that by these three kinds of proof, proof is established. Belief of that which is to be proven results from proof—The things to be proven are, Nature, Intellect, Egotism, the five subtile rudiments, the eleven organs, the five gross elements, and Soul. These five and twenty principles are classed as the perceptible, the imperceptible, and the percipient; and some are verifiable by perception, some by inference, and some by authority ; which is the threefold proof. The definition of each kind (of proof) is next given.

COMMENT.

The work pauses in its enumeration of the physical and metaphysical principles of the system, to define its dialectical portion, or the proofs which may be urged in support of its principles.

The doctrine that there are but three kinds of proof, is said to be supported by a text of the Védas: ‘Soul is either to be perceived, to be learned from authority, or to be inferred from reasoning *.’ It is opposed to the tenets of the Natydyikas and Mimdnsakas, the former of whom describe four kinds, and the latter six kinds of proof. The proofs of the logicians are, pratyaksha{, ‘perception; anumdaa}, ‘inference ;’ upamdnall, ‘comparison ;* and sabda§, ‘ verbal authority.’ Of these, comparison and verbal authority are included by the Sdénkhyas under right affirmation ; the term dpta** meaning ‘fit, right,’ and being applied either to the Védas {f, or to inspired teachers {{, as subsequently explained. The Mimdnsakas do recognise six kinds of proof; but Gavrardpa has either stated them incorrectly, or refers to a system different from that now found in the best authorities of this school. KumArita Buatra alludes

* ST aT cee: aire Aare | tert legal Voom, fore. “am otter «areas

p. 21